Taboo-XX wrote...
If he's as good as people say he is he'll step down and back off. Better yet he can side with us alongside Aria. Alternatively if he doesn't he can have his head reduced to a pile of goo by Aria.
Any of these endings is fine with me.
That's the core of the issue - forcing Petrovsky into a cartoon villain role he showed every indication of not occupying in ME:Invasion.MisterJB wrote...
For one, his actions are all meant to protect humanity whereas Aria acts out of pure greed and lust for power.Taboo-XX wrote...
He's blockading them in.
They're starving. Dying. He then attacked them when they tried to get food.
How is he better than Aria?
I'm willing to hear his justification regarding any blockade. However, if it is as simple as what you suggest, then Bioware is simply writing him OOC. The man who wouldn't allow explosives to be used for fear of civillians casualties wouldn't just let people starve.
Ieldra2 wrote...
You mean I should't expect minority tastes to be catered to. Perhaps not, but seeing the same conventional stuff again and again gets tiring after a while. And actually, books do it better. Or perhaps it's just that there are so many books that there's something for everyone. As games there are not.
Well, they had to put something bad in in order to make him a villain. And so he's as bad as Aria. You know what: that's the point. He may be. So why are we forced to work on Aria's behalf?
It would be nice if you stopped gloating, Taboo. I can tell you what is really hard: to hope, again and again, that there will be a story in a mainstream medium you can connect to. And to find disappointment again and again. As I said, it's ironic that ME3's ending might up as the part I like best, apart from Rannoch.
Let's say this: if Bioware wants to implement a meaningful choice, we'll get a choice about whose head - Aria's or Petrovsky's we'll turn into a pile of goo. Designing choices and good writing aren't necessarily connected. But I can echo the sentiment of course.MisterJB wrote...
Taboo-XX wrote...
If he's as good as people say he is he'll step down and back off. Better yet he can side with us alongside Aria. Alternatively if he doesn't he can have his head reduced to a pile of goo by Aria.
Any of these endings is fine with me.
If Bioware had good writers, they would let Shepard work with Petrovsky and turn Aria's head into a pile of goo.
Is... is that Miranda?Taboo-XX wrote... Surely you recognize this man?
Guest_Cthulhu42_*
I totally would have done that if it was an option.Barquiel wrote...
That's like saying ME2 is a bad RPG because we can't side with Captain Enyala.
Cthulhu42 wrote...
I thought all the ME comics were supposed to be awful. Is Invasion the exception or something?
Cthulhu42 wrote...
I totally would have done that if it was an option.Barquiel wrote...
That's like saying ME2 is a bad RPG because we can't side with Captain Enyala.
Cthulhu42 wrote...
I totally would have done that if it was an option.Barquiel wrote...
That's like saying ME2 is a bad RPG because we can't side with Captain Enyala.
Ieldra2 wrote...
That's the core of the issue - forcing Petrovsky into a cartoon villain role he showed every indication of not occupying in ME:Invasion.MisterJB wrote...
For one, his actions are all meant to protect humanity whereas Aria acts out of pure greed and lust for power.Taboo-XX wrote...
He's blockading them in.
They're starving. Dying. He then attacked them when they tried to get food.
How is he better than Aria?
I'm willing to hear his justification regarding any blockade. However, if it is as simple as what you suggest, then Bioware is simply writing him OOC. The man who wouldn't allow explosives to be used for fear of civillians casualties wouldn't just let people starve.
The other reason, too: I like ME:Invasion's Petrosky because he's working for a cause greater than himself, misguided as it may be, while being basically a decent guy within the limits of his military role. Aria is a crime lord. I respect her for seeing things clearly when I meet her on the Citadel: "As I see it, if you don't win this war, we're all dead. It's in my interest to help you", but in the end she cares about nothing but herself.
Modifié par Taboo-XX, 07 novembre 2012 - 08:25 .
kratos0294 wrote...
So Petrovsky has established blockades and is letting people starve to death......
And so the character assasination begins.
I just think it's a huge shame that Bioware actually creats an interesting Cerberus character in ME:Invasion, only to turn him into an evil thug.......Why ? Why are the writers doing this to themselves. They creat great foundations for complexe and interesting characters, only to simplify them and destroy the potential they created. I just don't undertsand what is this obscession with ME3 to over simplfy Cerberus.
We will see. I very much hope the DLC will surprise me and give an option to do something good with Mr. Petrovsky.
If not, by posterior shall be sore.
Argolas wrote...
I agree Ieldra, I hope Bioware listens.
It's exactly because I've see what came before - ME2 - that I expected a little more. ME3 went down the road of the conventional much further than I ever expected. Apart from the ending. Which is why many people claim the ending doesn't fit.Taboo-XX wrote...
As for the bolded you just hit the bell. It's mainstream media. This isn't something to gloat about. It's a blunt fact that's all. Why expect it when you've seen everything that has come before?
You shouldn't expect me to get references from popular culture. I'm really bad at that. The face is familiar, I've seen it a thousand times on pictures, but at the moment I can't assign a name to it.But I'm more disappointed that you didn't understand the reference I made. That stings. Surely you recognize this man?
Even worse: the message is "Feel. Don't think." I detest it.MisterJB wrote...
kratos0294 wrote...
So Petrovsky has established blockades and is letting people starve to death......
And so the character assasination begins.
I just think it's a huge shame that Bioware actually creats an interesting Cerberus character in ME:Invasion, only to turn him into an evil thug.......Why ? Why are the writers doing this to themselves. They creat great foundations for complexe and interesting characters, only to simplify them and destroy the potential they created. I just don't undertsand what is this obscession with ME3 to over simplfy Cerberus.
We will see. I very much hope the DLC will surprise me and give an option to do something good with Mr. Petrovsky.
If not, by posterior shall be sore.
Well, we wouldn't want our players to actually think about the moral and political ramifications of their actions. It's so much simpler to just helpfully tell us who are the "bad guys".
MisterJB wrote...
Well, we wouldn't want our players to actually think about the moral and political ramifications of their actions. It's so much simpler to just helpfully tell us who are the "bad guys".
Guest_Cthulhu42_*
Not even close.Argolas wrote...
Cthulhu42 wrote...
I totally would have done that if it was an option.Barquiel wrote...
That's like saying ME2 is a bad RPG because we can't side with Captain Enyala.
Nah, Captain Wasea was way better.
Not a terribly convincing argument.Besides, Miranda Lawson.
Applepie_Svk wrote...
Argolas wrote...
I agree Ieldra, I hope Bioware listens.
nope.jpg
Retour en haut
